COVID Breach

[Hadron Collider 30,860]

56 minutes ago, qwerty said:

Our Gaffer gets us.

He holds dear to his heart a set of standards, some of which will be non negotiables.

These standards epitomise what the Gaffer will insist upon in order to be a Ranger.

Non compliance to the required standard particularly the non negotiables set by the Gaffer will not be acceptable.

The Gaffer will have the morale courage, integrity and professionalism  to deal with the situation accordingly.

Regardless of watch the SFA deem to be a punishment.

I would not want to be one of the 5.

 

 

 

 

I totally get what you’re saying mate. However, should we be worrying about the sfa after what just happened with the refs going to officiate overseas?  I mentioned this shit in an earlier post. These cunts that run our football are as bad if not worse. For them to think about suspending our players after what they did is fucking double standards. I’m waiting to see what comes of this. Yes, our lads were wrong, but the sfa don’t have a fucking leg to stand on. Time to bring them down.   

[Terry Hurlock Loyal 12,133]

16 minutes ago, bluebear24 said:

I personally think the younger ones deserve some slack. Especially if it wasn't a party and just them and the other half's having a pizza, and not the wild party it's made out to be. I've broken lockdown rules. I had a little girl in Feb last year and there was no chance the old dear wasn't going to get to meet her granddaughter. If they weren't footballers no one would give anywhere near as big a shit. And everyone going ott ie. Get them the sack. Please tell me you haven't done anything you shouldn't have in the last 12 months. Because if you have maybe your employer should consider your position too 

Honestly, I haven't. Frankly, I'm completely fed up hearing about me me me excuses to bending the rules the MAJORITY of this country are following. As for this bunch, consider themselves very lucky - imo they should have been shifted on immediately.

[Ross-Gazza genius 1,907]

1 hour ago, TamCoopz said:

This is a fucking stupid comment. Of course plenty on here have broken covid rules, but we don’t play for a massive football club in the midst of a global pandemic, they should be setting the examples. Further to that, they’ve already witnessed two of their teammates break the rules and have seen the consequences (which could have been even worse had they caught the disease and spread it). Could have completely fucked our biggest season in years after all the work everyone has put in.

someone on here going to a party when they shouldn’t is not the same as a footballer going to a party 

Regardless of playing for a massive club or not it does matter. Folk on here want to be hypocritical and sink the boot in when they are doing the exact same thing. A 19 yr old setting an example?? Fuck me if I need a 19 yr old to set an example of how I should act in life then I've got even more problems than I thought. 

We've been locked down for almost a year to some degree, these players live their full life on the front pages of the newspaper and they are going to make poor life decisions along the way like we all have. Playing for a massive club doesn't make that any less of a probability, they are humans and are going to make mistakes and playing for the club we love won't change that.

I'll give you a scenario: what if you had broke covid rules and been out partying with 10 others and it so happened that someone in the group had covid, you are unaware and they pass it on to you. A few days pass(you are still unaware you have covid) and you go shopping only to see Morelos at the supermarket you obviously approach to get his autograph and have a wee bit of banter, but you unknowingly give him covid and boom you've now caused the full team to isolate for your stupidity on breaking covid. My point being regardless of who we are we all have a duty of care and if we don't follow then don't be hypocritical towards others. 

Rashford and Foden broke covid restrictions to get their end away whilst representing their country, did they get suspended? Did they get sacked? Is their careers over? Nope, nope and nope but folk won't care as they don't play for us. 

People need to stop giving advice to others, look at what you have done in the past and If every one of us put the same high expectations on ourselves as we put on Rangers players then maybe the whole world would be in a better place. 

[TamCoopz 19,605]

1 minute ago, Ross-Gazza genius said:

Regardless of playing for a massive club or not it does matter. Folk on here want to be hypocritical and sink the boot in when they are doing the exact same thing. A 19 yr old setting an example?? Fuck me if I need a 19 yr old to set an example of how I should act in life then I've got even more problems than I thought. 

We've been locked down for almost a year to some degree, these players live their full life on the front pages of the newspaper and they are going to make poor life decisions along the way like we all have. Playing for a massive club doesn't make that any less of a probability, they are humans and are going to make mistakes and playing for the club we love won't change that.

I'll give you a scenario: what if you had broke covid rules and been out partying with 10 others and it so happened that someone in the group had covid, you are unaware and they pass it on to you. A few days pass and you go shopping only to see Morelos at the supermarket you obviously approach to get his autograph and have a wee bit of banter, but you unknowingly give him covid and boom you've now caused the full team to isolate for your stupidity on breaking covid. My point being regardless of who we are we all have a duty of care and if we don't follow then don't be hypocritical towards others. 

Rashford and Foden broke covid restrictions to get their end away whilst representing their country, did they get suspended? Did they get sacked? Is their careers over? Nope, nope and nope but folk won't care as they don't play for us. 

People need to stop giving advice to others, look at what you have done in the past and If every one of us put the same high expectations on ourselves as we put on Rangers players then maybe the whole world would be in a better place. 

Not reading that ffs

[Ross-Gazza genius 1,907]

2 minutes ago, TamCoopz said:

Not reading that ffs

You should it's a good read 😂

[ger4life_1872 29,454]

Think my opinion on this is changing and mellowing a bit when it comes to the younger guys , I know I was a wee dick around the late teens- early 20's age and made plenty of mistakes 

[bluebear24 84]

5 hours ago, Terry Hurlock Loyal said:

Honestly, I haven't. Frankly, I'm completely fed up hearing about me me me excuses to bending the rules the MAJORITY of this country are following. As for this bunch, consider themselves very lucky - imo they should have been shifted on immediately.

Good for you mate. I'm glad that You have been able to stop your life for what's going on. I sell cars and up until November goes what I was in contact with somewhere in the region of about 50 people a day. And it's near on impossible  to socially  distance fully. But No excuse  here I chose to spend time with my family not knowing how much time I might get with them. I have had family pass because of covid and I still made that choice. But I wouldn't get the sack for it. So why should a couple  of kids

[bluebear24 84]

5 hours ago, TamCoopz said:

Unreal 

Why? Because I'm honest about it rather than pretend and judge a couple  of kids. OK they are in a higher profile job than me but why should they be judged differently. I would get the same fine if the police knocked on my door but personal time is personal time. And yes I understand  the ramifications  if one of them came back positive. But they didn't so you can't retrospectively punished someone for something  twice 

[TamCoopz 19,605]

1 hour ago, bluebear24 said:

Why? Because I'm honest about it rather than pretend and judge a couple  of kids. OK they are in a higher profile job than me but why should they be judged differently. I would get the same fine if the police knocked on my door but personal time is personal time. And yes I understand  the ramifications  if one of them came back positive. But they didn't so you can't retrospectively punished someone for something  twice 

But they’re in the public eye, when they’re out they constantly have to represent the club. When I’m out and about nobody knows who I work for so I’m not damaging the reputation of any companies by being a moron 

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,715]

10 hours ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

Employees have a right to be treated equally. This is set out in the ACAS Code of practice.

If two employees were found to have both committed the same offence, but one was treated differently than the other, then the one who was treated harshly would be able to raise a grievance and would probably win.

This would likely result in an employee who was on a fixed term contract being paid at least in part for the duration left on their contract.

Westlake v ZSL London Zoo ET/2201118/2015 is an interesting case that shows two employees who got into a fight, the company sacked one whilst keeping the other. The court found that this was wrong from the company. 

For them to be treated differently, the club would need to have documented notes detailing why they were treated differently based on the employees conduct prior to the action. This would include things such as verbal and written warnings on the employee record prior to the incident that took place.

Alternatively if the incidents in question were more or less serious would come into it, but it would not be to the clubs opinion but they would have to convince a judge that they incidents were significantly different.

Thanks 👍. Much of that I'm aware of other than that particular case law.

The scenario you provide isn't really what was being discussed given its 2 employees treated differently for conduct in the same incident. Of course parity in treatment there is absolutely essential otherwise risk to the organisation increases.

The discussed scenario was one where a player (one of the 5) was justly sacked for gross misconduct then made a claim because the club dealt differently with a different player (ie Morelos) breaching covid protocols at a later date.

The mechanism for such a process was sought and not provided. The complexities, implications and legal breaches of the sacked player obtaining sensitive disciplinary documents from an ex employer on a current employee not even considered. And all that whilst having to demonstrate two separate breaches have identical enough circumstances to warrant similar outcomes by the club, which we may find out proven not to be the case with the punishment of the current 5 compared to GE / JJ.

It's far from being the case that sacking any of the 5 would lead to us then forking out to them as a direct result of not sacking a higher valued player if he then offended.

[andyhrfc 2,242]

9 hours ago, Dickie said:

The vast majority of young people stay at home,what planet are you on,just walk about especially in any park and see what’s going on. In my local park there is organised 5/6 a sides with dozens taking part,most young folk I know don’t give COVID a second thought apart from the inconvenience of it.

Read the post.   I am talking about night time parties and you bring up the local park.  

[Bad Robot 21,148]

7 hours ago, Ross-Gazza genius said:

Regardless of playing for a massive club or not it does matter. Folk on here want to be hypocritical and sink the boot in when they are doing the exact same thing. A 19 yr old setting an example?? Fuck me if I need a 19 yr old to set an example of how I should act in life then I've got even more problems than I thought. 

We've been locked down for almost a year to some degree, these players live their full life on the front pages of the newspaper and they are going to make poor life decisions along the way like we all have. Playing for a massive club doesn't make that any less of a probability, they are humans and are going to make mistakes and playing for the club we love won't change that.

I'll give you a scenario: what if you had broke covid rules and been out partying with 10 others and it so happened that someone in the group had covid, you are unaware and they pass it on to you. A few days pass(you are still unaware you have covid) and you go shopping only to see Morelos at the supermarket you obviously approach to get his autograph and have a wee bit of banter, but you unknowingly give him covid and boom you've now caused the full team to isolate for your stupidity on breaking covid. My point being regardless of who we are we all have a duty of care and if we don't follow then don't be hypocritical towards others. 

Rashford and Foden broke covid restrictions to get their end away whilst representing their country, did they get suspended? Did they get sacked? Is their careers over? Nope, nope and nope but folk won't care as they don't play for us. 

People need to stop giving advice to others, look at what you have done in the past and If every one of us put the same high expectations on ourselves as we put on Rangers players then maybe the whole world would be in a better place. 

Anyone approaching our players in a supermarket for an autograph needs a kick in the balls. Banter and a socially distance photo yes no issues. I would imagine all clubs have told their players to not engage with autographs during this time.

[16BlueSherbert90 19,223]

Some of the comments on here 

They broke the rules, they represent our club 24/7. They are in the public eye regardless of who they are with...the media etc don't care or make exceptions. If there is a story to be told - exaggerated or not, it will be told. They know this, they saw what happened to their teammates who broke the rules, kids are kids some on here say...okay, so now they have to face up to the consequences of their own actions. It's as simple as that. It's done. Was the "pizza" really worth this?

Anyway, why argue the fuss about it now? Pointless effort. 

 

Ps...have we won 55 yet?

[Dickie 12,905]

30 minutes ago, andyhrfc said:

Read the post.   I am talking about night time parties and you bring up the local park.  

Try reading your own fucking post,not one mention of night time parties. You say most young people are staying in which is completely laughable and anyway inside or outside rules are rules. I take it you’ve not been in anyone’s house or had anyone in your house since lockdown,even the word lockdown is a joke no cunt is obeying it.

[16BlueSherbert90 19,223]

1 minute ago, Dickie said:

Try reading your own fucking post,not one mention of night time parties. You say most young people are staying in which is completely laughable and anyway inside or outside rules are rules. I take it you’ve not been in anyone’s house or had anyone in your house since lockdown,even the word lockdown is a joke no cunt is obeying it.

I'm obeying it actually...

Reason...my Ma and my job. 

Zoom and Whatsapp videochat is my saviour for keeping in contact with my family and friends. 

You say it's a joke...have you seen someone suffer from the severe issues of covid? Have you done hourly positional turns for someone suffering...have you seen someone struggle with their last breath due to covid? Have you lost someone to covid? 

Sure, not many are taking it seriously...and above is the reason why. If it hasn't been witnessed, why would they? 

[Dickie 12,905]

2 minutes ago, 16BlueSherbert90 said:

I'm obeying it actually...

Reason...my Ma and my job. 

Zoom and Whatsapp videochat is my saviour for keeping in contact with my family and friends. 

You say it's a joke...have you seen someone suffer from the severe issues of covid? Have you done hourly positional turns for someone suffering...have you seen someone struggle with their last breath due to covid? Have you lost someone to covid? 

Sure, not many are taking it seriously...and above is the reason why. If it hasn't been witnessed, why would they? 

So you’ve witnessed all this ? It’s probably because you’re a Walter Mitty type that you’re locked up.

[BridgeIsBlue 66,606]

14 hours ago, Dickie said:

If Livingston can give a reformed drug dealer a managers job then surely young guys who fucked up by having a few drinks should be given a second chance. They are facing a triple punishment are they also to have their careers ruined just for being young and stupid?

 

13 hours ago, left winger said:

Really fucking hard to argue with that.

Would we employ a convicted drug dealer as manager? 

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,715]

18 minutes ago, Dickie said:

Try reading your own fucking post,not one mention of night time parties. You say most young people are staying in which is completely laughable and anyway inside or outside rules are rules. I take it you’ve not been in anyone’s house or had anyone in your house since lockdown,even the word lockdown is a joke no cunt is obeying it.

There is a need for players to behave impeccably or football could be stopped. That's the warning given and needing heeded.

I've not followed every protocol impeccably, my job isn't dependent on it, and no one really bothers what goes on in my household other than me and my family. If I had the privilege of playing for Rangers my mindset, approach and conduct towards protocols would change entirely. Similarly I wouldn't be getting pished with my mates on a Friday the way I did pre covid. 

Everything changes when you're a pro footballer. It's a fucking ridiculous to compare what us fans do in our lives to in any way justify what these players did.

BTW this isn't a dig directly at you, just felt it fitted into replying here 👍

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

1 hour ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Thanks 👍. Much of that I'm aware of other than that particular case law.

The scenario you provide isn't really what was being discussed given its 2 employees treated differently for conduct in the same incident. Of course parity in treatment there is absolutely essential otherwise risk to the organisation increases.

The discussed scenario was one where a player (one of the 5) was justly sacked for gross misconduct then made a claim because the club dealt differently with a different player (ie Morelos) breaching covid protocols at a later date.

The mechanism for such a process was sought and not provided. The complexities, implications and legal breaches of the sacked player obtaining sensitive disciplinary documents from an ex employer on a current employee not even considered. And all that whilst having to demonstrate two separate breaches have identical enough circumstances to warrant similar outcomes by the club, which we may find out proven not to be the case with the punishment of the current 5 compared to GE / JJ.

It's far from being the case that sacking any of the 5 would lead to us then forking out to them as a direct result of not sacking a higher valued player if he then offended.

Enterprise Liverpool plc v Bauress and Ealey [2006] UKEAT/0645/05/MAA

This is a case about two similar but independent incidents of the same nature. In the first incident, the employee was given a written warning for the offence, in the second incident, two employees were sacked for the same offence. The court ultimately found that the company was okay in its action, but one of the key differences was the admission of guilt in the first case, vs lying in the second. I suspect that if their behaviour had been the same and they had admitted their guilt, they would have won their case. Admittedly, the length of service of the first guy also played a role, but I think it was more on the difference of behaviours.

Regardless, I think the club is doing the right thing. They have punished them all, the ones who show real promise and potential will be given another chance as they are undoubtedly valuable to the club.

The ones who are pretty shite have given the club the incentive to hasten their departure through putting them on the transfer list or sending them out on loan.

[GersInCanada 7,775]

From my initial rage at the 5 for behaving so badly and wanting them out of the club I have mellowed a bit and am happy for the club to deal with them as they see fit.

I doubt that the SFA will try to ban them. Still waiting to hear about Dubaigate and now their officials mess up. I expect them to keep their heads down and leave it to the club.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,715]

8 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

Enterprise Liverpool plc v Bauress and Ealey [2006] UKEAT/0645/05/MAA

This is a case about two similar but independent incidents of the same nature. In the first incident, the employee was given a written warning for the offence, in the second incident, two employees were sacked for the same offence. The court ultimately found that the company was okay in its action, but one of the key differences was the admission of guilt in the first case, vs lying in the second. I suspect that if their behaviour had been the same and they had admitted their guilt, they would have won their case. Admittedly, the length of service of the first guy also played a role, but I think it was more on the difference of behaviours.

Regardless, I think the club is doing the right thing. They have punished them all, the ones who show real promise and potential will be given another chance as they are undoubtedly valuable to the club.

The ones who are pretty shite have given the club the incentive to hasten their departure through putting them on the transfer list or sending them out on loan.

Again, that's parity for an employee based on previous dealings, not future ones.

What mechanism is there for a player justifiably sacked to seek recompense subsequently based on how his previous employer dealt at a later date with an offender more reasonably than with him.? And how does that individual go about justly obtaining the evidence needed to support his claim? And what is his claim - wrongful or unfair dismissal (justified), constructive dismissal (don't see how that fits), pure no fair dismissal (best fit yet)?

 

[left winger 14,146]

9 minutes ago, BridgeIsBlue said:

 

Would we employ a convicted drug dealer as manager? 

Probably not, but no one is suggesting we should. The point being made is that someone has been found guilty of a very serious crime and has spent time in jail, has been given a second chance. If that person can get a second chance, why can’t others who’s crime was punishable by a fixed penalty notice.

My first instincts on hearing what they have done was that none of them have a future at the club. However, I’ve come round to a ‘final warning’ point of view for them all, which I think more fairly reflects what they did and it’s consequences.

[BridgeIsBlue 66,606]

1 minute ago, left winger said:

Probably not, but no one is suggesting we should. The point being made is that someone has been found guilty of a very serious crime and has spent time in jail, has been given a second chance. If that person can get a second chance, why can’t others who’s crime was punishable by a fixed penalty notice.

My first instincts on hearing what they have done was that none of them have a future at the club. However, I’ve come round to a ‘final warning’ point of view for them all, which I think more fairly reflects what they did and it’s consequences.

Do we lower our standards just because a no mark club like Livingston have employed a convicted drug dealer? 

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

Just now, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Again, that's parity for an employee based on previous dealings, not future ones.

What mechanism is there for a player justifiably sacked to seek recompense subsequently based on how his previous employer dealt more reasonably than with him.? And how does that individual go about justly obtaining the evidence needed to support his claim? And what is his claim - wrongful or unfair dismissal (justified), constructive dismissal (don't see how that fits), pure no fair dismissal (best fit yet)?

 

The JJ/GE scenario was the precedent, so that kinda snookers us for how to treat the latest 5. Any ones that follow would be measured against these cases. If we tried to sack Mebude for instance, he would be able to show how we have set the precedent that its not a case of Gross Misconduct leading to Dismissal.

They could get the paperwork through the legal process, not sure if its called 'discovery' in the UK, but that kinda thing. The lawyers would have the power to request the evidence to show why the difference in treatment.

Wrongful Dismissal would be the charge I suspect. It certainly wouldnt be constructive dismissal.

[left winger 14,146]

1 minute ago, BridgeIsBlue said:

Do we lower our standards just because a no mark club like Livingston have employed a convicted drug dealer? 

Depends how you define standards. Showing fairness and compassion to folk who have fucked up is also a standard. They did something wrong - no doubts about it. However, a process that suspends them, possibly fines them, shows them the error of their ways, let’s them no there can be no repeat and is beneficial to them, and the club, in the longer term demonstrates a standard well worth having.